United States v. Morrison: Difference between revisions

From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |court=U.S. Supreme Court |citation=529 U.S. 598 |subject=Constitutional Law |appealed_from= |case_treatment=No |overturned= |partially_overturned= |reaff...")
 
m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "")
 
(3 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
|court=U.S. Supreme Court
|court=U.S. Supreme Court
|citation=529 U.S. 598
|citation=529 U.S. 598
|date=May 2000
|subject=Constitutional Law
|subject=Constitutional Law
|appealed_from=
|case_treatment=No
|overturned=
|partially_overturned=
|reaffirmed=
|questioned=
|criticized=
|distinguished=
|cited=
|followed=
|related=
|facts=The petitioner was raped at Virginia Tech by two members of the football team.  She became severely emotionally depressed and stopped attending classes and eventually withdrew from the university.  She filed suit against the members in the school’s administrative system, and one of the boys was suspended for two semesters.  After a re-trial, the boy’s punishment was set aside by a vice president of the college, and the petitioner filed suit in federal court under the Violence Against Women Act of 1994.
|facts=The petitioner was raped at Virginia Tech by two members of the football team.  She became severely emotionally depressed and stopped attending classes and eventually withdrew from the university.  She filed suit against the members in the school’s administrative system, and one of the boys was suspended for two semesters.  After a re-trial, the boy’s punishment was set aside by a vice president of the college, and the petitioner filed suit in federal court under the Violence Against Women Act of 1994.
|procedural_history=
|issues=#Whether Congress has authority to enact the [[Violence Against Women Act]] of 1994 under the Commerce clause.
|issues=#Whether Congress has authority to enact the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 under the Commerce clause.
#More specifically, whether a statute that defines a crime of violence motivated by gender have a substantial relation to interstate commerce.
#More specifically, whether a statute that defines a crime of violence motivated by gender have a substantial relation to interstate commerce.
|arguments=
#Whether Congress has authority to enact the [[Violence Against Women Act]] of 1994 under the [[Constitution_of_the_United_States#Section_1_.28Equal_protection_by_States.29|Equal Protection clause]] of the 14th Amendment
|holding=The Act is unconstitutional.
|holding=The Act is unconstitutional.
|judgment=
|rule=#Gender motivated crimes of violence are not economic in nature, and thus cannot be upheld under the [[Constitution_of_the_United_States#Commerce|Commerce Clause]] regulation.
|reasons=
#Congress may not regulate non-economic, violent criminal conduct based solely on that conduct’s aggregate effect on interstate commerce.
|rule=#Gender motivated crimes of violence are not economic in nature, and thus cannot be upheld under the Commerce Clause regulation.
#Congress may not regulate noneconomic, violent criminal conduct based solely on that conduct’s aggregate effect on interstate commerce.


The existence of congressional findings is not sufficient, by itself, to sustain the constitutionality of Commerce Clause litigation.
The existence of congressional findings is not sufficient, by itself, to sustain the constitutionality of Commerce Clause litigation.
|comments=
|case_text_links=
|Court_opinion_parts=
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 03:44, July 14, 2023

United States v. Morrison
Court U.S. Supreme Court
Citation 529 U.S. 598
Date decided May 2000

Facts

The petitioner was raped at Virginia Tech by two members of the football team. She became severely emotionally depressed and stopped attending classes and eventually withdrew from the university. She filed suit against the members in the school’s administrative system, and one of the boys was suspended for two semesters. After a re-trial, the boy’s punishment was set aside by a vice president of the college, and the petitioner filed suit in federal court under the Violence Against Women Act of 1994.

Issues

  1. Whether Congress has authority to enact the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 under the Commerce clause.
  2. More specifically, whether a statute that defines a crime of violence motivated by gender have a substantial relation to interstate commerce.
  3. Whether Congress has authority to enact the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 under the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment

Holding

The Act is unconstitutional.

Rule

  1. Gender motivated crimes of violence are not economic in nature, and thus cannot be upheld under the Commerce Clause regulation.
  2. Congress may not regulate non-economic, violent criminal conduct based solely on that conduct’s aggregate effect on interstate commerce.
The existence of congressional findings is not sufficient, by itself, to sustain the constitutionality of Commerce Clause litigation.